Can anyone more familiar with this case comment on what exactly happened here?
It sounds like two private organizations, DUH (Deutsche Umwelthilfe) and ClientEarth, sued a couple of cities (Munich, Stuttgart, and Dusseldorf, possibly among others), saying they had to improve air quality. This was, apparently, on the basis that the cities had illegally high levels of NOx -- I'm not certain on what basis this was illegal, whether German or EU regulations.
Munich offered a ban, which everyone was happy with. Stuttgart and Dusseldorf attempted to offer a mitigation strategy, and DUH and ClientEarth sued again saying that the mitigation was insufficient, and the judge ruled that they only a ban would suffice.
The cities appealed, apparently on the basis that they were not legally allowed to impose such a ban(?) and now, a higher court has ruled that they are legally allowed to impose such a ban.
It sounds like two private organizations, DUH (Deutsche Umwelthilfe) and ClientEarth, sued a couple of cities (Munich, Stuttgart, and Dusseldorf, possibly among others), saying they had to improve air quality. This was, apparently, on the basis that the cities had illegally high levels of NOx -- I'm not certain on what basis this was illegal, whether German or EU regulations.
Munich offered a ban, which everyone was happy with. Stuttgart and Dusseldorf attempted to offer a mitigation strategy, and DUH and ClientEarth sued again saying that the mitigation was insufficient, and the judge ruled that they only a ban would suffice.
The cities appealed, apparently on the basis that they were not legally allowed to impose such a ban(?) and now, a higher court has ruled that they are legally allowed to impose such a ban.